Americans of both parties overwhelmingly oppose a Supreme Court ruling that allows corporations and unions to spend as much as they want on political campaigns, and most favor new limits on such spending, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.
Last month, by a vote of 5 to 4, the U.S. Supreme Court gave carte blanche to the world’s largest corporations to spend unlimited sums of money to support or oppose candidates for elected office. Big Business domination of Washington and state capitals will now intensify.
The case of Citizens United portends dire consequences for the nation’s constitutional premise of “we the people,” not we the corporations. Our constitution, at its origins and through all of its amendments, makes no mention of corporate entities, only human beings and their government.
For 120 years, it was not Congress but the Supreme Court that expanded the definition of “persons” to include for-profit corporations for the purposes of applying constitutional protections. For 30 years, the court has granted First Amendment speech protections to corporations as “artificial persons.”
On Monday, both the Alaska House and Senate will introduce legislation affirming that corporations are not people FOR THE PURPOSES OF ELECTIONS. One of the sponsors is Hollis French, a long time legislator and gubernatorial candidate in Alaska’s next election. There are several sponsors on each bill at this point. More »
Shareholder Protection Act of 2010 (Introduced in House)
HR 4537 IH
H. R. 4537
To amend the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to require the express authorization of a majority of shareholders of a public company for certain political expenditures by that company, and for other purposes.